911 Traitor Glenn Beck is a Mocking Propagandist

What we were shown on September 11, 2001 were fake videos of planes crashing into the World Trade Center. While the focus of the 911 Truth Movement and Alex Jones has been on the US Government, the reality is that the transnational media companies enabled the massive deception operation of the September 11 attacks. Now the media have been caught and they're trying to laugh and giggle out of the noose that is rapidly tightening around their throats.

www.vloggingtheapocalypse.com...

So, you're saying what I saw on TV was just some hollywood film the government made and that aircraft didn't hit the towers?

What about the thousands of people on the ground? You know, the ones that were actually there and saw what happened?

911 traitor? Why? Simply because he has a different opinion than you do, that makes him a traitor? So much for independant thought on ATS.

Originally posted by jerico65
So, you're saying what I saw on TV was just some hollywood film the government made and that aircraft didn't hit the towers?

Im leaning more toward that belief though Im not quite 100% convinced..yet. Theres a lot of evidence to support this claim though.

Originally posted by jerico65What about the thousands of people on the ground? You know, the ones that were actually there and saw what happened?

What about the thousands that saw and heard an explosion but saw no plane? What about those that saw a missile? Which do you choose to believe and does that make it fact?

Originally posted by Nonchalant
What we were shown on September 11, 2001 were fake videos of planes crashing into the World Trade Center. www.vloggingtheapocalypse.com...

that has got to be the stupidest statement Ive ever read.. fake videos of planes crashing into the World Trade Center.. damnn. cant wait to tell the guys at the pub this one.. Im gonna make sure they have there mouths full when I tell em... cant wait to see the spray come out of the cheeks.. lol.. damn.. that was good..

Ok, let's look at what they actually provided as "evidence":

1. The flight paths are inconsistent. One flight path shows a steady even path, while others show a dive before hitting the building.

Actually, the even flight path shown still dips down and dives before hitting the video. They don't point this out in the analyzation, of course, but just the same you can clearly see it. Furthermore, the other clips of video they use to point out the inconsistency--that is, the supposedly conflicting video where the plane dives, are all close up. Meaning, we can only see right before the plane hits the building that it's clearly diving. What we can't see to compare is the path of the plane before it hit the building--the path shown in the "even" video.

2. Something about frame colors. I didn't even follow along because frankly it made no sense.

So who is the narrator who is analyzing these videos and presenting such expert conclusions? We have absolutely no idea. It could be an expert. It could be a kid in his mother's basement. It could be an alien.

All of this was used to demonstrate that the media faked the videos of 9/11 that we all saw that day. And therefore, the media is behind the conspiracy.

Hmm. Next.

reply to post by philjwolf


Sounds like my reaction when I saw aluminium planes on CNN piercing concrete and reinforced steel building columns..

[edit on 31-7-2008 by Nonchalant]

Originally posted by Nonchalant
reply to post by philjwolf

 

Sounds like my reaction when I saw aluminium planes on CNN piercing concrete and reinforced steel building columns..

[edit on 31-7-2008 by Nonchalant]

Aluminum planes loaded with passengers, cargo, fuel, and speed. Inertia does amazing things.

reply to post by Nonchalant


what are you talking about???? you can do that with water, hell.. you can do it with air..

Originally posted by Nonchalant
reply to post by philjwolf

 

Sounds like my reaction when I saw aluminium planes on CNN piercing concrete and reinforced steel building columns..

[edit on 31-7-2008 by Nonchalant]

Well, that pretty much dispels anything you've said. Much as Rosie claiming fire cannot melt steel.

reply to post by thrashee


According to Joseph Keith, a lead engineer at Boeing, the concept of an airliner penetrating a steel & concrete building is laughable. I guess he would know. His claim coupled with questionable video evidence provided by mainstream news media, raises some interesting questions.

www.vloggingtheapocalypse.com...

[edit on 31-7-2008 by Nonchalant]

Originally posted by Nonchalant

According to Joseph Keith, a lead engineer at Boeing, the concept of an airliner penetrating a steel & concrete building is laughable. I guess he would know. Couple his claim with questionable video evidence provided by mainstream news media, raises some interesting questions.

Not really. There have been just as many, if not more, engineers who haven't seen the problem Mr. Keith has.

As for the video, it's inherently bogus by virtue of the fact that there is no way of verifying it. It might as well have been a public access project, which is exactly what it looks like.

reply to post by thrashee


Thrashee.. I dont think you could convince this fella of anything.. I wonder if he thinks that the jets were suppose to bounce off... lol..

reply to post by philjwolf


You should do some more research on the subject of INERTIA. As can be clearly seen in the following video where 2 objects of similar mass and size impact they both absorb equal force. Now honestly, if you have 2 objects impacting and one is significantly smaller in size and mass what do you expect will happen? IMO you dont need a science major to figure out the result. But if your unsure, watch the following www.vloggingtheapocalypse.com...



[edit on 31-7-2008 by Nonchalant]

Nonchalant,

Do you have any links you could provide other than from a site that is...how shall we put it...less than unbiased?

Can a 767 Fly 500MPH @ 700ft Altitude? Boeing Official Says: Ha Ha Ha! Not a Chance!

So, taking discrete sound bites of Glenn Beck -- who expressed his opinion -- makes him a traitor? That production you posted, that's not slanted to jam a point a view is it? No, I guess Glenn Beck's face usually goes through a transmogrification of overlayed colors, not to mention talks in superspeed. I have to wonder what was so spot-on that Beck and guests said that made him a target of this faceless "TRUTH" production.

I don't agree with Glenn Beck all the time, but what I do believe is that he speaks his mind. He said 12% of Americans believe the U.S. Government planned and executed the 9/11 event. The production steps on top of that sound bite and calls him a media liar, saying that "50 percent of Americans think the government isn't telling the truth about 9/11". Well, that's not the same thing is it? I don't believe the government is telling the whole truth about it either, but I also don't believe that fake planes (rediculous!!!) slammed into the WTC.

How..... *sputter*.... in the world would all the ground witnesses be forced to collaborate the idea that those weren't aircraft that flew into the towers? How could it be even possible logistically to round up all the witnesses? There are other logistical problems with that, the least of which might be ......... if it was a missle instead of an airplane, how did the airline effects get inside the building? Let's examine a timeline of how this could even happen.

1. Target aircraft is taken over, and presumably landed somewhere. Curiously enough, the aircraft signiture is still in the air on radar.

2. Personal effects and aircraft flotsam and jetsam are removed from the aircraft, along with some organic material from passengers.

3. This aircraft stuff is loaded into the center section of a missile, which has been presumably taken secretly to this also secret airport. Good plan.

4. The missle is then launched, set to emulate the flight path of the aircraft.

5. I suppose then the actual aircraft and passengers are disposed of.

6. Government moles are onsite prior to the missile hitting the WTC, for the purpose of spreading through the crowd, to tell people what they just saw.

7. Everyone on the ground or in neighboring buildings either agrees to this story, or is "disappeared."

My God, is any part of that even possible???? Like many people, I think there are problems with parts of the whole 9/11 event. I must be part of the 50% that thinks the whole truth isn't out there. I think there are parts of the official story that should be investaged further, and I hope to be able to see those investigations. I think trying to convince people that the WTC was hit by anything other than airplanes is a foolish waste of time and resources. ........ and, of course, Glenn Beck, and anyone else who speaks their mind is a government tool. Yep, including the Popular Mechanics team who were also being lampooned by the production posted here. Yes, I know who owns P.M. I can't wait to get my payoff. More than 3400 characters I just typed, that oughta be worth a lot, huh?

All sarcasm aside, a more truthful way of analyzing Glenn Beck's words and actions (see how I manage to stay on topic here?) would be to look and the whole, unaltered clip of the show. Then compare it to this production.

Hopefully we can all find the truth of this horrible event, and hopefully we won't have to resort to smearing people we disagree with to find that truth.

Cheers

OK, I'm game.

What do you say to someone who say the plane with their naked eye, aka me. I was across the water from the trade center that morning smokin a cigarette watching what was going on with the impact.

Low and behold, we see another plane.

If you agree that no plane hit the WTC, then what DID happen.

Originally posted by Nonchalant
[What about the thousands that saw and heard an explosion but saw no plane? What about those that saw a missile? Which do you choose to believe and does that make it fact?

You mean that everyone in NYC walks around, looking up, just in case there is a plane crashing? That's why some people heard and explosion, but saw no aircraft. It had already struck the building.

[edit on 31-7-2008 by jerico65]

We are recording every channel 24hrs a day.
justice will come, be patient.
and show up in numbers with plenty of hidden cameras and microphones.

Oh boy!

It just amaze me when some one say something about 911 that dose not suport the Government version.

I see all the Debunkers come crawlling out of the wood work!

No you got it all wrong, You did not do your research, You dont know what you are talking about, the Government version is right, then the name calling starts.

And it just dosent end dose it.

I see a war in all the 911 threads, this war is ONLY of truthers and the Liers.

So far the Liers are loseing, I thank the thruth movement for thier hard work.

I think people who suport the Government version of 911 suport terroist,
torture. if you read how they all respond you can feel thier hatred agince the truth movement.... dripping with vinom.

Hey thats my take on it, thats what I read in all the 911 threads.

It a war people, truth V Liers.